4.  The applicant was born in 1984 and lives in Kherson.
5.  On 24 May 1999 the applicant was attacked by Ms P., Ms F., Ms M. and Ms B, who were all minors. She sustained various injuries.
6.  In November 1999, in the course of criminal proceedings pending before the Komsomolskyy District Court of Kherson (hereafter “the Komsomolskyy Court”), the applicant lodged against the four defendants a claim for compensation in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage.
7.  On 15 March 2000 the Komsomolskyy Court found Ms P., Ms B., and Ms F. guilty of aggravated hooliganism and sentenced them to three, one and one years’ imprisonment, respectively. By the same decision the applicant’s compensation claim was allowed in part and the statutory representatives of the convicted were ordered to pay the applicant UAH 16,578[1].
8.  On 16 May 2000 the Kherson Regional Court quashed the decision of the first instance court on the ground that the sentence was too lenient.
9.  On 3 August 2000 the Komsomolskyy Court again found the defendants guilty and sentenced them to four, three and three years’ imprisonment, respectively. By the same decision the court amnestied Ms B. and Ms F. It also awarded the applicant UAH 13,578[2] in compensation.
10.  On 3 October 2000 the Kherson Regional Court rejected the applicant’s appeal against the grant of amnesty, but quashed the decision of 3 August 2000 concerning the compensation award and remitted that part for a fresh consideration by a civil court.
11.  On 5 April 2001 the Presidium of the Kherson Regional Court, following the protest of its President initiated by the applicant, quashed the decisions of 3 August and 3 October 2000 to the extent that they concerned the conviction of Ms B. and Ms F. as the amnesty had been applied wrongly. The Presidium remitted that part of the case for a fresh consideration.
12.  On 26 July 2001 the Komsomolskyy Court released Ms B. from detention. On an unspecified date the proceedings against Ms B. were disjoined on the grounds that she had absconded.
13.  On 17 August 2001 the Komsomolskyy Court found Ms F. guilty of aggravated hooliganism and sentenced her to two years and two months’ imprisonment. The court applied an amnesty to her. It also ordered Ms P. and the statutory representative of Ms F. to pay the applicant UAH 1,580 in compensation for pecuniary and UAH 10,000 for non-pecuniary damage (UAH 11,580[3] in total).
14.  On 16 October 2001 the Kherson Regional Court of Appeal quashed the decision of 17 August 2001 concerning the award in respect of pecuniary damage and remitted that part for a fresh consideration to a civil court.
15.  On 28 November 2001 the applicant’s representative lodged a cassation appeal against the judgments of 17 August and 16 October 2001 requesting the court, in particular, to examine the compensation claim in the criminal proceedings and to increase the amount awarded.
16.  On 23 May 2002 the panel of three judges of the Supreme Court allowed in part the cassation appeal and quashed the decision of 17 August 2001 concerning the award in respect of non-pecuniary damage. That part of the case was also remitted for a fresh consideration to a civil court.
17.  On 4 October 2002 the Komsomolskyy Court found Ms M. guilty of aggravated hooliganism and sentenced her to three years’ imprisonment. It refused to deal with the applicant’s compensation claim because her representative had failed to appear before the court.
18.  Following the decision of the Kherson Regional Court of 3 October 2000 (see paragraph 10), the applicant’s compensation claim was remitted to the Komsomolskyy Court.
19.  On 17 April 2001 the court found in part for the applicant and ordered Ms P. and the statutory representatives of Ms B. and Ms F. to pay the applicant UAH 46,578[4] in compensation for pecuniary and non‑pecuniary damage.
20.  On 30 May 2001 the Kherson Regional Court, allowing the applicant’s appeal, quashed the decision of 17 April 2001 and remitted the case for fresh consideration. It held that the first instance court had failed to consider all the arguments of the parties.
21.  As a result of the decision of the Kherson Regional Court of Appeal of 16 October 2001 in the criminal proceedings (see paragraph 14 above), the question of compensation by Ms P. and Ms F. for pecuniary damage was again pending before the Komsomolskyy Court.
22.  On 31 October and 4 December 2001 the court refused to consider the applicant’s claims on the ground that she, a minor at the time, did not have full legal capacity.
23.  As a result of the ruling of the Supreme Court of 23 May 2002 (see paragraph 16 above), the question of compensation by Ms P. and Ms F for non-pecuniary damage was also pending before the Komsomolskyy Court.
24.  On 8 September 2002 the hearings were resumed.
25.  On 14 November 2002 the applicant lodged a civil claim against Ms M.
26.  On 17 September 2003 the court found in part for the applicant and ordered Ms P., Ms F. and Ms M. to pay the applicant UAH 21,664[5] compensation.
27.  On 18 February 2004 the Kherson Regional Court of Appeal upheld the judgment of 17 September 2003.
28.  On 16 May 2006 the Supreme Court rejected the applicant’s cassation appeal, thereby terminating the proceedings.
29.  On 14 January 2002 the applicant lodged with the Komsomolskyy District Bailiffs’ Service (hereafter “the Bailiffs”) a writ of execution for the judgment of 17 August 2001.
30.  On 21 August 2002 the Bailiffs returned the writ to the applicant due to the debtors’ lack of funds.
31.  On 3 March 2004 the Bailiffs instituted enforcement proceedings in respect of the judgment of 17 September 2003.
32.  On 28 July 2004 the proceedings were discontinued due to the debtors’ lack of funds.
33.  In September 2004 the Komsomolskyy Court refused to deal with the applicant’s complaint against the Bailiffs as it had been lodged out of time.